Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-04-02
State AFFAIRS.
The House Passes the Tax Extension
Bill to Third Reading---Judge
Willis Case in the Senate.
Lengthy Arguments for the Prosecution
aud Defense by Attorney Cen
eral HOgg andJHdge Willis.
House Passes a BIN 10 Regulate Shipment
of Freights and to r, quirs Rail
ways to Furn sh Cars
TO REGULATE SHIPMENTS OF FRE1Gurs.

TO REGULATE SHIPMENTS OF FREIGHTS.
AUSTIN, TEX April IA bill to regu-
late the shipment of freightS aud to re-
quire railway companies to furnish suf-
fcent cars to transport the same, and TO
provide penalties for failure so to do,
came up in the House this morning, and,
after q lengthy discussion and the adop-
zion of several amendments, the bill
passed. The provisions of this bill, ID
substance, require the railway companies,
when the owners or managers OF any
freight of any kind shall MAKE ap-
plication in writing to the superln-
tendent or person in charge of
transportation of any railway company
operating line at the point the cars are
desired upon which TO ship auy freight,
to supply the number of cars indicated
in the application within six days from
the receipt thereof.
THE TAX EXTENSION BILL.
The bill t. extend the time for the pay
ment of taxes due for the year 1886 and
to exempt real and personal property
from forced sale for taxes so due until Sep
TENDER /, 1887, came up in the House
this morning on q motion to suspend the
rules and adopt the minority for the ma
jprity report, the minority report being
in favor of the passage of the bill. The
rules were suspended and the report
adopted. The bill then passed to third
reading by vote of 63 to Is. The pro-
visions Of the bill extend relief to the en-
tire state, there being no exempted cOun-
ties.
JUDGE WILLIS PROSECUTION.
Attorn, y-Gen IA HogG and JudgeWillis
anG his counsel, M7j)r Walton and Judge
Carol, a. peared before the Scua,e this
evening to conduct the proceedings
n the further investigation of
the charges preferred 0y the
special committee appointed by the Sen
ate to inquire into the changes Is they
came from the House f Representatives,
Attorney General HDgg opened the aTgu-
ment in behalf of the tTOsecuti Il. In his
preliminary remarks he gave a brief
synopsis of the circumstances that
br ught about this investigation, referring
TO matters of evidence that nave already
been published in THE GAzETTE. He
said that he referred to these facts to
place the matter properly before The Sen
ate. He then laid before the Senate he
issues made out by the defendant, which
were as follows:
l. That Proceedings Of an address must
originate with joint committee Of both
hocs es.
That the proceedings of an address
must be tried before a joint session of
both houses.
3 That Judge Willis could not be ad-
dressed out of office for acts committed
before his last election.
4 That the House acted without con-
authority in preferrirg the
Charges.
Addressing himself to these issues, as
made out by the respondent, he said
that the proceedings in matters of ad-
dress, like joint resolution, can origin
ate in either house and become concur
rent Oy eacn house acting upon the pro-
ceedings as they came Fl ION the her. He
read from authorities TO sustain his argu-
ment, among them Mr.. CushiDg's, where
il stated that proceeding of an address
cou be originated Dy Joint committee,
out the common practice was for each
house TO act stparately. He then re-
ferred to the issue raised by the respOn-
dent, that the fiuding Of the House was
Illegal because the vote by which the
charges were sustained was not a two
thirds vote, because it was not tWO-thirds
of the members ell cted. To this issue he
answered by reading decisions from the
reports of Missouri, Mississippi and
Michigan, that held the term two
thirds vote of each house to mean two
thirds of the members present, and not
twO-lhirds of the members elected. Then
TO the issue raised by the re-
spondent, that the re election of Judge
Willis last fall stopped proceedings 10
him out of office for acts com
mitted during his former term of office,
he read from the constitution, article Is,
section s, where the Legislature had
power to regulate their own proceedings
except Wher- theiI powers were limited
by tue constitution, claiming that that
article of the Revised Statutes defined the
causes for which judges can be addressed
out Of flee and he proceedings therein.
The Attorney General then took the
position that the Legislature was the
supreme power of the state next to the
pe ople, only limited by the constitution;
that they could practically nullify the
powers of the other branches of the
government. They can withhold the ap-
and destroy the power of
the executive, repeal the laws and destroy
the Supreme court, therefore the Legis-
lature was the supreme power IN the
of the government, only SUD-
iecttO one power higher and that was
the constitution that came direct from
the people, and that is the reason why the
power Of trying high crimes and INSIDE
meanors, those acts that cannot De COM
mitted by the private citizen and for
which there is no penal law punishment
prescribed, is gwen 10 the legislative
branch of the government. Meeting the
issue raised by the respondent that he
cou'd not be tried for acts committed
during a former term of his Office, he read
the proceedings in the impeachment trial
of Mr.. Belknap before the United States
Senate, where the same issue was raised
by the respondent in that case, wherein
he claimed that he was a private citizen
of the state of Iowa and could not be
tried for Ofenses charged to have
been committed while in Office.